Monday, August 09, 2010

Anne Milton Was Right

Imagine it. You're a junior minister and get a letter from the Prime Minister reinforcing his view that reducing the deficit is the number one issue facing the government, and urging you to find as many savings as you possibly can in the area of policy that you administer. But when you find a saving of £50 million and write to your Scottish counterpart urging them to follow your lead, all hell breaks loose because you suggest withdrawing free school milk from the under 5s. Your rationale is that it costs £50 million and it's of unproven benefit.

But instead of standing by you, or at least merely saying that no final decision has been made, Number Ten throws you to the wolves and performs the fastest U turn in history. And this from an administration that prides itself, according to the PM's letter, in thinking "for the long term".

Yesterday, David Cameron wrote this in the Sunday Times...

"The truth is there will be some things that we genuinely value that will have to go because of the legacy we have been left."

Clearly school milk doesn't fall under that category. It ought to.

I was 8 years old when Mrs Thatcher abolished school milk for the over sevens. I hated the stuff so I was profoundly grateful. I suspect that like many children today I refused to drink it. It was very low quality milk and quite often had been left out in the sun. A cursory survey of the two people I know who run nurseries proves my point. At least half the milk goes to waste, they told me.

And to be honest, should the state actually be seeking to replace the role of the parent here. Surely it is up to parents to ensure their children eat and drink the right things? If I was spending £50 million I might think it would be better spent on a bit of targeted health education.

And just by way of pointing out a few facts, those who accuse the Tories of delighting in withdrawing things like school milk, should remember that it was Labour in 1968 who withdrew school milk for 11-16 year olds. Over to John Redwood, who has done a little research...

What we need to do is a little detective work. The biggest “milk snatchers” were Labour. In 1968 they took free school milk away from all 11 to 18 year olds. The Conservatives did not dub Harold Wilson a milk thief, but accepted this economy as part of the package to cut the excessive borrowing of that Labour government. No subsequent government, including the Labour governments of 1997 to 2010 thought free school milk worth reintroducing. Most people cannot remember that Edward Short was Education Secretary for most of 1968 (I looked it up)when the free milk was withdrawn, because no-one ran a campaign claiming he left us short of free milk.

In 1971 Edward Heath’s government took milk away from 7 to 11 year olds. This was opposed by Labour, who personalised it to the Education Secretary. Labour have always treated Mrs Thatcher in a mean and personal way. They dubbed her “Milk snatcher” rather than coming up with a phrase like “Edward Heath, milk thief”. Doubtless if the Education Secretary in the 1979-1990 governments had cut free school milk they would still have personalised it to Margaret Thatcher, then Prime Minister.

The BBC website tells us free milk for 5, 6 and 7 year olds had gone “by 1980″ without telling us which Minister removed it. Nor did they name the Labour Ministers responsible in 1968 for the main cut. There’s bias for you, after the account of how Margaret Thatcher had done her bit to cut it. People were so untroubled by the removal of free milk for 5-7 year olds that few can remember who did it.

Labour in office did not restore milk to primary school children, despite finding money for everything else, and despite still reminding people from time to time of their “Milk snatcher” jibe.

It is high time we moved on from these lurid lies and silly soundbites. The truth is all three parties in power from 1968-2010 went along with the phased removal of free milk in schools. Presumably they did so because they recognised there were better ways of helping children from low income families with dietary needs. I am prepared to say I support the results of both Harold Wilson and Edward Heath’s decision to remove free school milk as an economy measure, though I disagreed with many of the things both these Prime Ministers did in other fields. Any truthful politician should say the same, as no mainstream politician in living memory has campaigned to restore these “brutal cuts” from a long-gone era.

41 comments:

The benefits of milk to children are well know. Merely the fact that milk is high protein is of unarguable benefit to growing children.

Forging an argument along the lines of "but Labour took away milk as well" is not an argument for taking away free milk.

If this really was about saving money and not about ideology the government would have shown greater concern with taking away the susbsidies lavished upon faith schools rather than snatching away one of the few sources of protein for poorer children.

The media storm, hypocritical and opportunistic though it would have been, would have dominated the cuts debate and made it impossible to carry out much more important savings elsewhere (and undermined the coalition).

Cameron and the coalition are in danger of being a Government by the media.

Milk should be scrapped and replaced by Water far more beneficial. In fact I am campaigning for Water to be allowed in every classroom as we know the Brain functions better when the body is not dehydrated.

Free school milk was great but only in the winter when it was cold. The little bottles were so cute. So many kids hated it I used to get to drink at least three bottles of it.

However, cows milk is a food designed to increase the size of a huge young mammal very fast. It isn't designed for humans. Most of us lose the enzymes required to digest it properly by the time we are 18, even if we had them in the first place (the Chinese in general don't have the digestive enzyme).

Then there is the concern that milk is linked to increased susceptibility to ovarian and prostate cancer...perhaps we shouldn't be handing out something for "free" to kids that, in time and with scientific advancement, will sue us for giving them cancer.

Anne Milton was right, but the way BBC Breakfast was pilling into the story early on Sunday morning you can see why number 10 acted as they did.BBC news while acknowledging that cuts should be made seems to be jumping on every cut the Government proposes and turning it into a political issue rather than an economic one. It is about time the BBC was brought down to size starting with this ridiculous new billion pound development in the north west.

Right or wrong, it was handled in a politically naive way. A Conservative government trying to anything perceived as negative in Scotland before in England will draw the ire of the public and media. Combined with the Milk Snatcher accusations, this approach was never going to work.

We'll probably see this pushed through Parliament here in England first, followed by some more carefully worded pressure on the Scottish Parliament to follow suit. Of course since this is a Scottish Parliament governed issue, careful pressure is all that can be done from here...

Look back to history. A minister, a junior minister would have to be stark staring bonkers and thick as a pillock to leap in with both feet and shouting 'Geronimo' as well to announce the cutting of free school milk - without first asking a few quite questions.

Any minister with the total lack of political history and political nouse that would dive in like this does not, quite frankly, deserve to be a minister.

£50 million - if I had been labour I would have been able to point to any number of civil service perks left untouched that could have covered this cost.

Milk has nutritional benefits there is no doubt, and yes good patents should make sure there offspring have a balanced diet. Now wake up get out to some of the schools in some of the deprived areas of northern Britain and tell me some of these kids don't need extra help and a small safety net. No doubt you have nice organic milk on your swiss muesli in a morning.

It is a topic which merits further investigation and discussions but why did she write to her Scottish Counterpart ?a) Its none of her business. The matter is covered by the Devolution Settlement and as such a matter for the Scottish people through their elected representativesb) As it is an SNP controlled Government, she should know that any such correspondence willbe leaked to the Press

Anne Milton was daft to even go near this one. Given her other comments recently I'm wondering why she was appointed - it certainly wasn't for her looks (unless camera is a fan of pugs!). She's coming across as a loud-mouthed liability.

Milk has nutritional benefits there is no doubt, and yes good patents should make sure there offspring have a balanced diet. Now wake up get out to some of the schools in some of the deprived areas of northern Britain and tell me some of these kids don't need extra help and a small safety net. No doubt you have nice organic milk on your swiss muesli in a morning.

I ascribe my love of all cheeses to drinking milk at infant school. It was either turning sour or, on one memorable occasion, frozen solid in the bottle. In hot weather we were allowed to "drink" it outside which undoubtedly accounted for the grass in the playground being especially lush. As simon says above, I reckon the dairies supplying it benefit most from "free" milk.

I think the comments here are correct.Politically it was much too far a cut to be attempted. The negative media from just suggesting it shows that DC was right and the cuts are going to be as political as they are brutal.

All this hand-wringing about milk for 'the poor'. Children entitled to free school lunches should get their milk with their lunch - there is absolutely no need to provide it to thousands who don't need it. It reeks of nanny statism and if you can afford a pack of fags you can afford milk for your kids.

Labour are experts at twisting facts to attack Margaret Thatcher. When Mrs. Thatcher once sugessted stocking up on tinned food to beat raging inflation, Dennis Skinner accused her of "filching little tins of salmon from supermarkets and taking them out of the pensioners' mouths."

All areas of Government are ripe for cutting after years of Labour bloat. Nothing should be ring-fenced whether the aid budget or domestic social or welfare services. We need more adult, considered government and less knee-jerkism from Dave (who I am increasingly glad not to have voted for).

James Bloodworth does not understand the diversity of humanity. There are tens of thousands, perhaps millions, of children who suffer from being forced to drink cows' milk. "Unarguable" - bah humbug! High protein food is of value but, apart from milk being high-fat rather than high-protein, it is unsuitable for many children (and not just Chinese). When I started school no-one noticed that I didn't drink milk; at the time it was made compulsory I was the second largest child in the class, by the time my (then) school made it optional I was the second smallest.

What a complete and utter shambles this Government is. And remind me, who is the relevant Secretary of State in this case? Away with Michael Gove. Away with him.

But Margaret Thatcher's time as Education Secretary does not deserve to be remembered best for the withdrawal of free school milk. It deserves to be remembered best, if that is the word, for the closure of so many grammar schools that there were not enough left at the end for her record ever to be equalled.

Just to set the context - I did not vote Conservative at the last election - while I am philosophically conservative my local candidate was an illiterate idiot standing on a platform opposing polices voted by the local Conservative council (which rendered both ridiculous).

So when I hear a recent A lister on Radio 4 saying of the DC intervention "I don't think it smacks of good government...", I feel here we go again, except Cameron's intervention was that of a man who became leader of his party because he understood that politics is the art of the possible and you didn't become a candidate because you clearly don't.

Of course it made economic sense to stop the milk - but the political price to pay would have been too high - just look at what the suggestion it might happen has produced.

I don't mind you being wrong - it's the useless damage that you do by making a fuss about it.

Let me prescribe a little less media excitement and a little more reflection.

...points out that free milk was abolished in 1980, ie by the Tories and not labour. So Redwood seems to be wrong - and any partisan justification for cutting it again is misplaced. And this was for teenagers, not babies. It was further restricted in '88.

So once again I think it wise for Cameron to scupper the notion that babies should have it withdrawn. Maybe they should but its a hard case to argue.